systems’ hypocrisy theory: the divergence of ergonomics and organizational health
TRANSCRIPT
SYSTEMS’ HYPOCRISY THEORY: THE DIVERGENCE OF ERGONOMICS AND ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH
Peter J. Stavroulakis Dr. Elena Riza
Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology & Medical Statistics
Medical School of Athens
4th International Conference on Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies in the Economic and Administrative Sciences, 21-22 May 2015, TEI of Athens
Introduction
“Ergonomics is concerned with the understanding of interactions among humans and other elements of a system...in order to optimize human well-being and overall system performance”
Ergonomics facilitate the harmonic co-existence people’s needs, abilities and limitations
Its reason of existence is the conciliation of human beings and systems
Objective
The optimum synergy between human beings, their respective task and/or environment is a field that is as old as human beings themselves, an ever-ending pursuit and a journey in perpetuity
How are we able to get the job done with the minimum of cost whilst attaining the quality standard requested, whence simultaneously the people getting the job done remain content?
Literature Review
The state of the discipline can be traced thousands of years ago (Marmaras et alli, 1999)
Needs of the incorporation of ergonomics’ considerations in planning (Ivergård, 1973)
The dimensions of this application, its interdependencies and considerations have been registered (Trist, 1981)
Theberge and Neumann (2010) provide an inventory of the intricacies concerning the practice of ergonomics and as to the holistic approach that should be sought after
Observed by Carayon (2006) as well, where a case of participatory ergonomics showcased the variable sectors wherein ergonomics can provide beneficial change
Ergonomics and Systems
Ergonomics’ can be applied wherever system theory surfaces (Stanton et alli, 2006) and within all contexts of an organizational setting and environment (Wilson, 2000)
Specific guidelines as to the implementation of ergonomics can be evidenced (Grote, 2014)
Top level existence of ergonomics’ culture is uncontested (Hendrick, 1991)
Socio-technical approach (Jensen, 2002) and the concept of ‘joint optimization’
Crystallization of the holistic systemic principle
Extension of Applicability
Bongers et alli (2006) present the extended benefits deriving from ergonomic interventions, including their inherent psychosocial factors
The links between organizational structure, planning, quality and innovation are investigated and how these aspects can be interwoven with strategic management and ergonomics (Slappendel, 1994; Dul & Neumann, 2009)
Major organizational issues can be nullified with a complete ergonomic approach
Ergonomics’ Corollaries
There is a high-level component of this discipline that can be included
Component of systemic health, as the intangible ingredient in all our operations
The route is there and it is not only feasible, but the road more manageable
Whence utilizing a holistic system approach and taking under consideration all systemic interconnections, dysfunction is absent
Organizational Health
The concept has come to be considered the ultimate goal of an organization
The stepping stone of a sustainable competitive advantage
We are able to observe many models (Lin & Lin, 2014) linking organizational health with cultural manifestations
Anthropocentric shift: from work to well-being for people and from monetary returns to health for organizations
Threads of the Theory
Major components of the organizational health concept are kept within values and the intangible aspects of organizations (Tuan, 2013) such as trust and knowledge sharing
Impact and importance of communication styles (Hicks, 2011)
Vinberg and Gelin (2005) investigate organizational and health performance and come to support the holistic approach
Golzari (2012) found a direct correlation of organizational health with customer satisfaction
Commitment, Satisfaction and Evolution Shoaf et alli (2004) propose specific metrics of
organizational health assessment Yüceler et alli (2013) found correlations of
organizational health to organizational commitment Mako et alli (2012) stress the importance of dynamic
metrics of job satisfaction Thompson et alli (1985) demonstrated the need to
have a solid organizational family from the aspects of: 1. employee evolution 2. organizational recognition
Health andAnthropocentrism
Cheramie et alli (2007) indicate the importance of overall organizational health with respect to loyalty
Wright (1969) indicates the importance of a diagnostic and pathological approach
Perry and Barney (1981): realistic goals have to be set on a basis of anthropocentric values
Common Ground
The concept of organizational health is the most promising, systemic and holistic; for this reason we move to correlate it with ergonomics for they share a mutual infrastructure of effectiveness through anthropocentrism
Merger of Concepts
A merger of ergonomics with the framework of organizational health should be pursued:1. Through this fusion a healthy ecosystem will
emerge, for it will find benefit in mutualism 2. Understanding and accepting the mutual
functionality that a holistic ergonomics’ culture provides is what will lead to organizational health
Theory Formulation
Health pertains to the vision Strategy is the flight plan towards vision Ergonomics is the path towards organizational
health
Systemic Isolation
If a system lacks a holistic ergonomics’ approach it’s doomed to isolation, for it will not communicate
It will be a component within a super-system and it will be alone
Isolation will lead to structural and functional discrepancies and organizational chronic disease
Systems’ Failure
If the system does not hold in its core a culture of ergonomics, it will fail
Is it in part because of this fact that we observe systems with ideal conceptual constructs
1. conceptual planning2. regulatory infrastructure 3. dynamic directives4. mitigating policies
That nevertheless fail hopelessly in real-world practice
Veneers of Isolation The verdict is one of subsequent decay, because
sustainability will never materialize
Systems’ Hypocrisy
If a human system is left in isolation, we will lose all that is human
Isolation is hypocrisy If we are referring to systems, it’s systems’
hypocrisy Organizational health metrics are a correlation
of hypocrisy, since hypocrisy is the exact opposite of health
Humans are Core
We can never diverge from the fact that human beings are the central component, even if the system is automated:1. planning2. design3. maintenance4. oversight authority 5. feedback6. utilization
Are still left for and to the human factor
Conceptual Construct
Only whence a system has accepted its humane intrinsic constructs it is able to function
In an occupational case it will resemble:1. the intoxicated asking for a trace of a dose 2. the person in love that wishes to never part with a
partner This is the benefit of the correlation of ergonomics
with organizational health: Systems will manifest as partner components
functioning in synergy and harmony with one another
Conclusions
Ergonomics’ culture can be regarded as a systemic catalyst of excellence
Organizational health provides a holistic framework that will offer sustainability through the abundance of collective well-being
Ergonomics paired with occupational health can be the key to organizational permanence
All this will be able to materialize if systemic hypocrisy is absent, for it is an index of systemic disease
Limitations
The applicability of this model depends on systemic culture
Additional dimension that has to be considered
Coordination, shared values and prerequisites Working environments’ globalization, as many
times its manifestation is not a product of systematic study
Future Directions
Metrics of the theory could be developed in order to provide quantitative constituents
Analytical construct that will provide a dynamic complementary aspect with respect to the conceptual model
Empirical study of the correlation of ergonomics’ culture and organizational health
Thank you for your attention!
Peter J. Stavroulakis ([email protected])
Dr. Elena Riza ([email protected])
Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology & Medical Statistics, Medical School of Athens